National Post editorial board: Dealing with an empowered Abbas

Palestine: Dealing with an empowered Abbas

We agree with our government’s stand against the Palestinians’ bid for observer-state status at the United Nations. The Palestinians have long sought the status, similar to what is enjoyed by Vatican City, as a symbolic international ratification of the Palestinian argument for statehood. But the appropriate venue for resolving this issue is bilateral negotiations with the government of Israel. The fact that such negotiations have been deadlocked for years does not give the Palestinians license to shortcut the process.

Nevertheless, on Thursday, the UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly in favour of giving the Palestinians the recognition they sought. Canada, the United States, Israel and six other countries voted against the motion; 41 other nations abstained. Thousands of Palestinians celebrated in the streets after the votes were counted, but Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird had it right when he downplayed the event’s practical importance, at least in the short term. The motion will do nothing to address the economic plight of many Palestinians, nor will it make them any freer from religious oppression and corrupt leadership. And the motion certainly won’t do anything to address Israel’s very real security concerns and its citizens’ fully justified desire to live in peace behind secure, defensible borders — which we regard as the paramount consideration.

“We have to be realistic,” Mr. Baird correctly observed after the vote. “[The peace] process has to be led by the two parties. … That can’t be imposed by anyone else — not the UN, not Canada, not anyone.”

Related

In reaction to the vote, Canada has recalled its diplomats from the UN, the Palestinian Authority and Israel — ostensibly for consultations, but really as a gesture of frustration at the outcome of Thursday’s vote. Canada isn’t breaking off diplomatic relations (certainly not with our Israeli allies), but clearly seeks to demonstrate that we are dismayed by the recent developments. Israel, in turn, immediately approved the construction of 3,000 new homes in Jerusalem and West Bank settlements, a move clearly meant as a rebuke to the notion that the UN’s recognition of the Palestinians as an observer state will impact Israel’s policies.

However unfortunate this week’s events at the UN, we can’t conclude that either the Canadian or Israeli actions will help matters.

Canada, despite its laudably staunch support of Israel’s right to self-defence against aggression, is not a major player in the Middle East peace process. The notion of Canada as an “honest broker” in the region — much cherished by our foreign policy elites — was always a myth (except perhaps in 1956). The most significant players in the peace process are the Israelis, the Palestinians, the United States, and in a far more sinister guise, the Iranians, who value their terrorist proxies in Gaza as part of their anti-Israeli arsenal. Given that, the withdrawal of our diplomats, whose most important purpose is to help Canadians traveling overseas, as well as our UN staff, seems rather melodramatic. We hope that these “consultations” back in Ottawa are brief indeed.

Israel’s decision to approve 3,000 additional housing units in contested areas is unhelpful for a different reason. As American and Israeli leaders alike have noted, border adjustments and territory swaps will necessarily be part of any final peace agreement. And Palestinians understandably interpret new settlement construction as an attempt to create facts on the ground that serve to render future negotiations moot.

Israel’s greatest asset is that it is, by any objective standard, a civilized and humane nation, with a democratically elected government. In the recent conflict with Hamas, these qualities were on full display — with Israel launching carefully modulated strikes against Hamas missiles and terrorists, while Hamas fired its rockets indiscriminately at Israeli population centers. Whatever Israelis’ frustration with the outcome of that conflict, there is no doubt that Israel came off as restrained, measured and well-considered in its response — avoiding a ground invasion that would have caused a large death toll among Palestinians and Israelis alike.

Mr. Netanyahu’s response to this week’s UN vote sent a different message. To survive in a hostile Middle East, Israel must always project an image of strength. But the decision to build fresh settlements the day after a UN vote seems short-sighted, and even somewhat peevish. This is not how a strong, confident nation reacts to a diplomatic setback — especially a setback that, according to Mr. Netanyahu — won’t really change Israeli attitudes.

Israel has a strong case to make on everything from borders to security. Both Mr. Netanyahu, and his allies, must be careful in what message they send as they protect Israel’s fundamental right to security.